David Tua versus Jim Corbett

I find it hilarious how much people want to mention the "evolution" of boxing, yet leave out that many of these changes would give Corbett an advantage.

 

Corbett wins by a wide U decision. He out speeds and outboxes the very limited Tua easily. 12-3 in rounds.

 

Corbett by first round KO





Well maybe not but if he is smart and he is he can win as long as he stays away from the bombs.

 

This place never disappoints!

 

I'd have to go with Tua.

The pioneering techniques that gave Corbett et al an edge over their contemporaries are today's basics and/or superceded. Frankly this could be brutal for Corbett especially given the massive size disparity.

 

Tua - 11

Corbett - 5

In people's picks so far.

 

I sometimes think that people don’t understand just what a pygmy Tua is in historical terms.

If there was a contender in Joe Louis’s era with the equivalent credentials, only hard core Louis fans would look into the details of his career, and everybody else wouldn’t think it worth bothering.

If there was a contender in Corbett’s era with the equivalent credentials, then even people with a specific interest in the era wouldn’t be able to tell you much about him.

 

Size Discrepancy?

I just did some basic google searches so this could be wrong, but Jim Corbett is 73 inches (my source was a post made by Mendoza) vs a tua websit ewhich lists Tua at 5 '10 and 70 inches.

Does that make Corbett the bigger fighter?

 

Size Discrepancy?

I just did some basic google searches so this could be wrong, but Jim Corbett is 73 inches (my source was a post made by Mendoza) and 6' 1 vs a tua websit ewhich lists Tua at 5 '10 and 70 inches.

Does that make Corbett the bigger fighter?

 

Yes, just like how Tommy Hearns was bigger than Mike Tyson. :good

 

Not true. The thing is those of us who watch fight footage and understand the sport don't have to rely on the "credentials" that you seem to value above all else.

 

Corbett was 6'1" with a 73" reach and under 190 Lbs. He went 11-4-3 (5) overall and 2-3 (2) in HW world title fights. He was stopped 3 times. He beat Joe Choynski KO2 (their first fight was called off after 4 rounds by police, NC), he beat Jake Kilrain W6, he basically sparred with Peter Jackson for 61 rounds before the fight was ruled a NC, he stopped John L. Sullivan in the 21st round (Sullivan was in his mid 30's which was ancient for boxing in those days), he basically fought an exhibition with Tom Sharkey D4, and he beat Charles McCoy KO5. He was stopped by Bob Fitzsimmons LKOby14, lost to Tom Sharkey LDQ9, was stopped by James J. Jeffries LKOby23 and LKOby10.

Tua stands 5'10" with a 70" reach and weighed between 223-245 in his biggest fights. He went 52-5-2 (43) overall and 0-1 in HW world title fights. He was never stopped. He stopped HW world title holder John Ruiz in 19 seconds, he stopped HW world title holder Oleg Maskaev in the 11th round, he stopped Lineal HW Champ Hasim Rahman in the 10th round (they also fought to a draw over 12 rounds in their rematch), he stopped Lineal HW Champ Michael Moorer in 30 seconds, and he stopped CW world title holder Robert Daniels in the 3rd round. He also beat David Izon KO5, Fres Oquendo KO9, Darroll Wilson KO1, and Obed Sullivan KO1 among others. He went toe to toe with Ike Ibeabuchi and lost a very close decision that could have been a draw. He took shots from Lennox Lewis for 12 rounds and never got hurt.

 

No you have to rely on the fight footage, which can be equally misleading, or more misleading.

 

I think Tua could manage to stop Corbett at some point. Yes, I understand that Corbett fought past the 12th round in 4 of his fights and Tua never fought past the 12th round... but let's look a little closer. NC61, KO21, LKOby23, and LKOby14. He won 1 fight that went past 12 rounds, lost 2 of those fights by KO, and the other was a No-Contest. Corbett's other fights didn't go past the 6th round mark (which means he only won 1 fight that went longer than 6 rounds).

Tua went past the 6th round in 22 of his fights.

 

Not if you know what you're looking at. Fight footage can be misleading on the margins but even some of the worst footage gives a good sense of the techniques, skills, and physical attributes of fighters. No comparison to all the fairy tales and myths that fans passed down over the years about the heavyweights of the early years in the absence of film. Why do you think so many reasonable people found it comical when they finally found film footage of these early champions and realized how inadequate their techniques were?